[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110330092542.6344b324@s6510>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:25:42 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To: Sasikanth V <sasikanth.v19@...il.com>
Cc: shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BRIDGE: As per 802.1D clause 9.3.4 Added support to
prevent processing port's own BPDU (If a loopback condition exists)
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 21:03:36 +0530
Sasikanth V <sasikanth.v19@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Sasikanth V <sasikanth.v19@...il.com>
> ---
> net/bridge/br_private.h | 1 +
> net/bridge/br_stp.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> net/bridge/br_stp_if.c | 2 ++
> net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_private.h b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> index 387013d..d9f79dd 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_private.h
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ struct net_bridge_port
> #ifdef CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER
> struct netpoll *np;
> #endif
> + u8 is_own_bpdu; /*Port recvd its own BPDU*/
> };
>
> #define br_port_exists(dev) (dev->priv_flags & IFF_BRIDGE_PORT)
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_stp.c b/net/bridge/br_stp.c
> index 7370d14..491d9c6 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_stp.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_stp.c
> @@ -107,6 +107,12 @@ static void br_root_selection(struct net_bridge *br)
> u16 root_port = 0;
>
> list_for_each_entry(p, &br->port_list, list) {
> + /*Don't consider the Port for root selection
> + which rx'd its own bpdu because of loopback
> + in the bridge
> + */
> + if (p->is_own_bpdu)
> + continue;
> if (br_should_become_root_port(p, root_port))
> root_port = p->port_no;
>
> @@ -278,8 +284,16 @@ static int br_supersedes_port_info(struct net_bridge_port *p, struct br_config_b
> if (memcmp(&bpdu->bridge_id, &p->br->bridge_id, 8))
> return 1;
>
> - if (bpdu->port_id <= p->designated_port)
> + if (bpdu->port_id <= p->designated_port) {
> + /*802.1D 9.3.4 Validation of received BPDUs
> + NOTE 1—If the Bridge Identifier and Port Identifier both
> + match the values that would be transmitted in a Configuration
> + BPDU, the BPDU is discarded to prevent processing of the Port’s
> + own BPDUs;*/
> + if (bpdu->port_id == p->designated_port)
> + p->is_own_bpdu = 1;
> return 1;
> + }
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -411,7 +425,7 @@ void br_port_state_selection(struct net_bridge *br)
> p->config_pending = 0;
> p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> br_make_forwarding(p);
> - } else if (br_is_designated_port(p)) {
> + } else if (!p->is_own_bpdu && br_is_designated_port(p)) {
> del_timer(&p->message_age_timer);
> br_make_forwarding(p);
> } else {
> @@ -446,6 +460,8 @@ void br_received_config_bpdu(struct net_bridge_port *p, struct br_config_bpdu *b
> br = p->br;
> was_root = br_is_root_bridge(br);
>
> + p->is_own_bpdu = 0;
> +
> if (br_supersedes_port_info(p, bpdu)) {
> br_record_config_information(p, bpdu);
> br_configuration_update(br);
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_stp_if.c b/net/bridge/br_stp_if.c
> index 5593f5a..fc4ec63 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_stp_if.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_stp_if.c
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ void br_init_port(struct net_bridge_port *p)
> p->state = BR_STATE_BLOCKING;
> p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> p->config_pending = 0;
> + p->is_own_bpdu = 0;
> }
>
> /* called under bridge lock */
> @@ -101,6 +102,7 @@ void br_stp_disable_port(struct net_bridge_port *p)
> p->state = BR_STATE_DISABLED;
> p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> p->config_pending = 0;
> + p->is_own_bpdu = 0;
>
> del_timer(&p->message_age_timer);
> del_timer(&p->forward_delay_timer);
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c b/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c
> index 3e96514..99ea288 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ static void br_message_age_timer_expired(unsigned long arg)
> spin_lock(&br->lock);
> if (p->state == BR_STATE_DISABLED)
> goto unlock;
> + p->is_own_bpdu = 0;
> was_root = br_is_root_bridge(br);
>
> br_become_designated_port(p);
The idea is valid, but putting state variable per port is an
ugly way to solve it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists